This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: newppc-branch: Cleanups again
Am Sam, 19 Feb 2000 schrieb Geoff Keating:
>Franz Sirl <Franz.Sirl-kernel@lauterbach.com> writes:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> my next bunch of cleanups for the newppc-branch.
>>
>> OK to commit?
>>
>>
>> I'm still looking at these macros conflicting between rs6000.h and sysv4.h:
>>
>> - STRICT_ALIGNMENT, STACK_BOUNDARY, BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT, etc: I'm leaning towards
>> moving all alignment macros (except SLOW_UNALIGNED_ACCESS) from rs6000.h to
>> aix.h and duplicate some for sysv4.h. Opinions?
>>
>> - ASM_OUTPUT_SPECIAL_POOL_ENTRY_P, ENCODE_SECTION_INFO: these 2 look like
>> candidates for merging the versions in rs6000.h and sysv4.h?
>>
>> - ASM_OUTPUT_INT: move from rs6000.h to aix.h?
>>
>> Franz.
>>
>>
>> * aix.h (FP_SAVE_INLINE, ASM_OUTPUT_INTERNAL_LABEL_PREFIX,
>> TEXT_SECTION_ASM_OP, DATA_SECTION_ASM_OP: Move here...
>> * rs6000.h: from here.
>
>Some of this won't apply because of my recent commit. Sorry about
>that. Try again?
Hmm, are you sure you have committed everything? I made this patch against
todays CVS after your last cleanup patch a few hours ago. If it doesn't apply
for you, something must be different? Otherwise OK for commit?
>> * rs6000.h (CPP_DEFAULT_SPEC): Change to empty string.
>> * aix.h (CPP_DEFAULT_SPEC): Define default for AIX.
>
>Hmmm. Actually, this should be triggered off TARGET_CPU_DEFAULT. I
>wonder if we can change it in OVERRIDE_OPTIONS? Then we could delete
>the whole macro. There are a number of places where we define some
>bit of the spec based on the CPU type and get it only half-right.
I will put this one on hold for now and check your suggestions.
Franz.